Nitrome Wiki talk:Disclaimer
Disclaimer: *a statement that denies something, especially responsibility (Oxford English Dictionary) *a denial or disavowal of legal claim (Merriam-Webster) This is just to remind us what a disclaimer should or should not contain. SQhi•'''(talk)500 Mainspace Edits(finally!) Page protection Since this page could be in a future even more important than the main page of the wiki, maybe we should protect it once it's finished, because anyone could directly change it at any time, and specially in this page that could be dangerous, even once the edit is reverted. Also, if only an admin/bcrat can "approve" it, but anyone can edit after that, even having good faith, the later edits would not be officialy "approved". Should we protect the page once it's finished? 10:59, September 5, 2012 (UTC) : I agree. Once is completed, our grammarians have checked through it and the comminity approves, we should seal it (sysop protect)A template should also proclaim this is an important document that should not be edited without community consultation. It should then not be touched unless there are issues with the document. SQhi•'(talk)Ruby 11:41, September 5, 2012 (UTC) ::I'm fine with protecting this, considering it's going through a formal process. I think if it is an important document, it should also be made aware of to the community before protecting it. 07:08, September 9, 2012 (UTC) Spoiler disclaimer I'm thinking we might need to add a disclaimer about spoilers on here, as some users can get quite antsy when it comes to spoilers and spoiler content. Even though Nitrome Wiki makes an effort to conceal spoilers on pages, we still cannot cover everything when it comes to newer users adding a spoiler as trivia, for example, or if a code that hides spoilers temporarily malfunctions. 07:14, September 9, 2012 (UTC) :Yes I agree. RSK, perhaps you can start adding that section? Should we also have a disclaimer on server uptime, in case anything reall happens? SQhi'•'(talk)Ruby 09:40, September 9, 2012 (UTC) Spoiler JavaScript. I suggest we add a one-time JavaScript cover on our Main Page on a user's first landing requesting them to read 3 documents. Our Disclaimer, TOU and navigation guide(I'll set it up after we're done with the Disclaimer). SQhi'•'(talk)Ruby 09:46, September 9, 2012 (UTC) :I don't think that's the right decision. Some people come here to read about Nitrome, not edit the wiki. But the general idea is good. Maybe we could extend it only to users. 12:06, September 9, 2012 (UTC) ::look again Takeshi, this disclaimer is universal. It applies whether you read or edit. :::I'm not saying it's not important for both... I'm saying that if I come to a wiki to browse, I don't want to find the main page blocked off before I can read anything. If someone goes to Nitrome Wiki and sees a large blank page, do you think they're going to come again? I think it should be less disrupting than that. 14:41, September 9, 2012 (UTC) ::::Agreed. Even though the disclaimer is universal, linking it on the front page is good enough. Obstructing the main page view to try and force people to read the policies, disclaimer and terms of use is quite disruptive and will most likely chase readers away. 01:18, September 10, 2012 (UTC) :::::We really should place it very prominently though, and we needn't track if it is being read. I think we can do that though having two counters one on home and another on the disclaimerSQhi'•'(talk)Ruby 05:04, September 10, 2012 (UTC) Reset indent It's not necesary to encourage users to read it, the disclaimer on a web is only for the people that wants to read it, and usually is linked with a small link at the bottom of the site. We can say the disclaimer is like a life vest: probably we'll almost-never have to use it, but it's needed to have it somewhere to prevent problems. In a nutshell: users don't have to be forced to read it. 10:58, September 10, 2012 (UTC) :[https://twitter.com/int_main/status/237266103938740226 Sometimes the damage is already done '''before' they read the disclaimer.] We need to make sure it both doesn't obstruct readers' view of the wiki, and the people who want to see it can easily find it. We don't want to tuck it away in a corner, and when someone breaks our policy, say, "Ha ha! You broke the rules because you didn't look at our disclaimer! Not our fault!" XD : 11:35, September 10, 2012 (UTC) ::I was thinking about that xD. Well we cvan do like Runescape Wiki and add the disclaimer link to the Wiki Navigation. We need a code to add things to "On the wiki" tab, but a while ago I found that code. Do I add to the Wiki Navigation? 12:03, September 10, 2012 (UTC) Finalising We should work on finalising this thing...it's been a WIP since September. I added an additional section about spoilers, since even covering spoilers does not guarantee anyone can browse Nitrome Wiki without accidentally running into one. If there is anything else that needs to be added, addressed or fixed, please do! 05:04, April 6, 2013 (UTC) :We should remove that WIP and start applying the disclaimer. 11:00, April 6, 2013 (UTC) ::I think we need some additional consent from the *cough* community members. Well, speak now, or forever hold your peace. (Ha! I always love saying that.) 05:59, April 7, 2013 (UTC) :::Posting as an official Nitrome employee. This controversial section has to be ironed out! SQhi•'''(talk)84k edit 06:14, April 7, 2013 (UTC) ::::I agree with removing the WIP. The disclaimer looks fine to me. -- 13:52, April 7, 2013 (UTC) :The disclaimer looks okay. I agree on removing the WIP. -- 20:56, April 7, 2013 (UTC) ::::Hold on, SQhi, what is the issue with the employee bit? 05:39, April 14, 2013 (UTC) :A grammar and sentence structure check. Check for clarity and simple English. The content of the Disclaimer is good to go. Just these. SQhi•'(talk)500 Mainspace Edits(finally!) 09:22, April 14, 2013 (UTC) For identification purposes, we strongly suggest you create an account to facilitate communication and help us recognize you as a valid source. We seek your understanding in this matter. So, a staff member, who is an official source, is required to have an account to be recognised as a valid source. This is the issue. It will be taken as official Nitrome Wiki policy. SQhi'•'(talk)500 Mainspace Edits(finally!) 09:22, April 14, 2013 (UTC) :Okay, that I'd strongly disagree to. Nitrome employees, if they were to come on here and create an account, should be treated as any other user in the sense that they can only add verifiable content to pages. No one can tell right away who edits a page based on just looking at it. 16:25, April 14, 2013 (UTC) ::Yeah, even if we could tell if an editor is a Nitrome employee (which would be very difficult), we should still treat that editor the same as any other. -- 16:40, April 14, 2013 (UTC) Something to consider? Since we are drafting our disclaimer, why not look to Nitrome's for inspiration, I thought. http://www.nitrome.com/terms/ *the uptime and functioning of the website *advertisements and links to third-party websites *target age group (maybe not?) SQhi'•'''(talk)500 Mainspace Edits(finally!) 11:56, April 14, 2013 (UTC)